I just discovered that Facebook has a breast controversy.

According to several news sources, the social networking site deletes photos of women if they are breastfeeding… or is it that their babies are breastfeeding?  Okay, I’m a bit confused on the verbiage, but Facebook is not confused about the Terms of Use.  If you have a Facebook account, you agreed to the Terms of Use, which includes the provision that “photos containing a fully exposed breast” are subject to removal from the site.  No caveat for when the breast is being employed in a mammary fashion versus the Girls Gone Wild display that was certainly the impetus for the rule in the first place.  And thus, controversy.

Of course, nothing is ever this clear.  For example, one of the photos in question is so un-indecent that the Washington Post feels comfortable posting it on their site.  And in that photo, I don’t even see a fully exposed breast.  Sure, it would be exposed if the opaque baby’s head wasn’t in the way.  But we could say that about all breasts–they would be exposed if you were to just move a few opaque items that are currently in the way.  Facebook seems in this case to be stretching the letter of their own law just a bit.

The woman in this particular photo has started a group called “Hey Facebook, Breastfeeding is Not Obscene,” the membership of which was just under 70,000 the last time I looked.  Obscene is a legal term, so let’s look at the law for a moment.  The website for the National Conference of State Legislatures offers a summary of the breastfeeding laws of various US states and territories.  It says,

Forty states, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands have laws with language specifically allowing women to breastfeed in any public or private location.

Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin are the ten who are not listed with that specific language.  But Michigan law states that public nudity laws do not apply to a woman breastfeeding a child.  South Dakota laws exempt mothers who are breastfeeding from indecency laws.  Virginia law guarantees a woman the right to breastfeed her child on any property owned, leased or controlled by the state, and exempts mothers engaged in breastfeeding from indecent exposure laws.  Washington law states that the act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not indecent exposure.  Wisconsin laws provide that breastfeeding mothers are not in violation of criminal statutes of indecent or obscene exposure.

A note to Facebook:  That leaves Idaho, Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Dakota, and West Virginia whose laws don’t expressly address breastfeeding in public as acceptable.  That’s five (5) low population states out of the whole nation.  And again, we’re talking about breastfeeding, not sexual displays or gratuitous toplessness in the streets.  (To be clear, I am not opposing gratuitous toplessness in the streets.  Nor advocating it.  I’m just saying it’s not the issue here.)

But let’s also note to the upset breastfeeding moms on Facebook that the internet extends a bit beyond the territory of the USA, and Facebook’s idea of indecency has to take into consideration the laws and mores of every nation on Earth.  International organizations and websites have to decide how to handle the varying mores and attitudes around the globe, and it appears that in this case the company in question has chosen to err on the side of caution.  You and I may feel that this is prudish, but the fact is that if one doesn’t like Facebook’s rules (and if one can’t convince the site to change them), then one doesn’t have to use that website.

While I applaud the group “Hey Facebook, Breastfeeding is Not Obscene,” and their attempts to persuade the site to change their policy, I do hope that everybody in the group recognizes that the definition of obscenity is actually complex and subjective.  Facebook is probably doing the best it can to promote universal accessibility.  For now, that may mean that when it comes to obscenity, Mark Zuckerberg and his team will have to rely on the famous wisdom of Justice Potter Stewart: “I know it when I see it”.

Tweet  Print This Post

Tags: on the law, technology // Add Comment »